(3 of 3)
QUESTIONABLE FILM RATINGS
The government's efforts to restrict youngsters' exposure to violent films are laudable [NATION, June 21], but two critical issues have been overlooked. Many movies that are R-rated [requiring that those 17 and under be accompanied by a parent] should be classified as the more restrictive NC-17 [barring anyone under 17]. Such uneven labeling makes a mockery of the film ratings. An R-rated film should prohibit any child under 13. Also, it's quite possible for parents to take toddlers and children to violent and explicit R-rated movies. Parents must be made more aware of just how badly young children are affected by viewing violence. However, in the interim we must not sit idly by condoning this deplorable treatment of children. ORLANDO B. DOYLE, PRESIDENT Impact Seminars for Youth Detroit
I am a 16-year-old, and it is clear to me that a vast majority of R-rated movies should not be rated so strictly. If there is more than one F word in a movie, it's R-rated, but even with a nude scene, Titanic gets a PG-13. That's ludicrous. Walk through the halls of any high school, and you will hear worse profanity and more sexually explicit conversations than in most R-rated movies. Walk across the street from the school, and you will often observe violence and drug use. The effect of seeing violence or hearing sexually explicit talk should not be pinned on Hollywood. It starts with parents. The kids copy the parents, and other youngsters copy those kids. Maybe we should start rating our homes and schools rather than our movies. NAME WITHHELD BY REQUEST Mount Vernon, Ill.
WARMTH ON WARMING?
Global warming [SCIENCE, June 21] occurs on a time scale that the average human being cannot relate to, and that's the reason for a lot of the public apathy about this issue. We say to ourselves, "It's so far off in the future." But remember, failure to take care of a problem in the early stages led to the Y2K situation. PAUL R. HERSHBERG Tallahassee, Fla.
American industries are making tremendous progress in reducing greenhouse-gas emissions without sinking our economy. Led by government-industry cooperation and voluntary programs, we are improving efficiency and creating the technologies of tomorrow right now. Industry is putting the environment first yet keeping the economy strong. GLENN KELLY, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR Global Climate Coalition Washington
There are policies that could reduce greenhouse emissions and at the same time boost economic growth and raise living standards. One such policy, called an environmental tax shift, would move a portion of the tax base away from income, wages and profits and onto pollution and fossil-fuel consumption. Tax shifts greatly reduce the economic costs of emissions reductions because they use market mechanisms rather than regulation to drive changes in behavior, and they also provide a way to reduce taxes on income and profits. M. JEFF HAMOND, DEPUTY DIRECTOR Incentives Program Redefining Progress Washington
RED ALERT: HOMOPHONES!
You warned about body piercing and noted precautions to be taken against infections in those who "can't resist a naval ring" [Personal Time: Your Health, June 21]. Isn't a naval ring something worn only by Annapolis graduates? Guess you meant navel. Ah, for a spell checker that warns about homophones! LARRY STOOKEY Rockville, Md.